I'm no lawyer, but have been thru the FCC testing process a few times. For a ordinary device that doesn't deliberately transmit (called "unintentional radiator" by the FCC), there is no legal requirement for certifcation. There are legal requirements for what it is allowed to emit, but it up to you how to make sure your device works within the rules.
You can simply sell a unintentionally radiating device without testing. However, if someone files a complaint and the device is found to exceed the legal radiation limits, you're in deep doodoo. If you had the device tested by a accredited test lab and they determined it was within the limits, your legal case will be much better. The FCC still has the right to force you to withdraw the product and even confiscate every unit out there, but if you can show you followed accepted practices of testing then there will be much less of a issue of punative actions.
Intentional radiators are a different story. You do have to have FCC certification to legally sell one in the United States. When the device is certified, you get a certification ID, and that ID generally has to be indicated somewhere on the outside of the device where others can see it.
In the case of a bluetooth module, most likely the module vendor has gotten the certification for the module. If not, I wouldn't go near it. Even if so though, you are still on the hook for the product as a whole. The module will also be certified with some restrictions, like a specific list of antennas that it is certified with. If you attach a different antenna, for example, the module is no longer certified and you're on your own.
If you're trying to sell a intentionally radiating product, you'd better talk to a expert early in the process. You can wing it a bit with unitnentional radiators, but you really don't want to play games with intentional radiators, even if you're using a certified module that does all the intentional radiating.
It might be a good idea to talk to a testing house. They generally will know all the rules. Just keep in mind they sell testing services, and their answers may a bit biased towards you needing a lot of testing.
The problem I was actually having with the module, was a hardware problem. I tried to connect the Bluetooth module power to the VCC pin of the target board of the MSP. It is a 3.3v source, which is appears to be compatible. But the maximum current that could pass through that pin was 15mA, which is enough to set the device discoverable but it stays short when trying to establish a connection (needs around 35mA). Hence, I was able to see it, but got an error upon establishing a connection. Hope this helps somebody else in the future.
Best Answer
What discrepancy? Nothing they show in the table and then in the graph is is in disagreement. The table is of maximum allowable spectral power densities at each center frequency. That means that for a given center frequency (in this case, 2402MHz), the power spectral density cannot exceed 8 dBm per 3kHz bandwidth. The spectrum analyzer is set to show the power FFT with a 3kHz resolution (you can see this in the lower left corner). So the graph is of the power density per 3kHz, and the graph is centered on 2402MHz. There no issue at all. No where is the power spectrum even close to the limit - 8dBm. So it passes. The entire span of the channel is shown, and the span of that channel meets all the criteria. Which is that no part of the signal's spectrum exceed 8dBm per 3kHz. There is no discrepancy to allow or not allow.
The marker is irrelevant. Most spectrum analyzers place a marker on the peak power measured. Which is what we want. The peak power density over any 3kHz bandwidth slice along the 2402MHz spectrum is -19.621dBm/3kHz. The frequency that the peak happens to be is completely irrelevant to what is being measured, and what is being evaluated, and beyond that, almost certainly doesn't mean anything at all. It's just a random bandwidth slice along the spectrum that happened to be slightly higher than the others.